Looking for other pro science people on here
Options
Replies
-
Add me so I can not sell you Beachbody, not quote Bible verses, not rave about the latest at Whole Foods, not whine about my Wheat Belly, not spam you with petitions against Monsanto.
Science for the win.0 -
shinycrazy wrote: »I'm with you all! I don't got for detox stuff! I have kidneys, they do all that for me! Give me science based facts please. Add me!
Well, If you have a working liver and kidneys, congratulations! You've got your very own built-in detoxing system!0 -
I like to base my fitness decisions on facts and somewhat proven bases as well. There is just so much information out there even 'scientific' that it is hard to filter. Feel free to add me, I am looking for extra motivation 0
-
What really chaps my behind is when people advocate all those wraps, etc. I have a former student who is a "sales rep" for "ItWorks!" wraps, and she posts almost DAILY on Facebook about how it can help you shed pounds by melting them away. On the other hand, I haven't posted anything on FB about my weight loss, through just sensible eating and calorie-counting, and I started this journey mid-January (down almost 80 pounds).0
-
I love that you added this and want to follow this thread! I'm a retired medical doctor.
One word of caution, though, is that the studies in this area are not reliable enough that they don't contradict one another very frequently. A quick look through the "Well" blogs on the NY Times will give you contradictory information about how much you need to exercise and what to eat to maximize weight loss or general fitness, all that information supported by scientific research. Also, consider how dietary recommendations have changed over the years (now it's that we didn't need to be drinking skim milk), although a lot of those recommendations were not based in hard enough science. So, I'd say common sense is still in order, and view anything new with skepticism until it is well replicated.
Another thought is that psychology is also a science, with more overlap with biology all the time as we learn more about neurotransmitters and brain activity as they affect behavior. Considering the factors that influence behavior can be a huge help in losing weight. Is that something that you want in in this thread, or should that be its own topic?
If Shadowfax_c11 is an animal trainer, maybe she can add her opinion here and a better explanation than I can give, but there has been a lot of old and well-documented research in the field of behavior. You probably all know Skinner and Pavlov, but look up Bob Bailey, the Brelands, and Dr. Susan Friedman, whose field is applied behavioral analysis, in Utah (behaviorworks.org).
I don't think that anyone here doubts the validity of CICO, the need for a nutritious diet, especially in the long term, and the benefits of exercise. However, despite our knowing that we were eating more than we should have been to maintain or lose weight, we did it anyway. Losing weight required a change in the behavior of eating. In animal training through positive reinforcement, it is beneficial to set the learner up for success by controlling the antecedents, that is, setting the stage so that the learner is more likely to be right. Controlling the antecedents can be hugely helpful in achieving weight loss. Examples would be (1) getting enough sleep, as there are studies showing that sleep deprivation is linked to weight gain and increased appetite - so, maybe turning off the laptop and turning in to bed will help (2) having healthy meals ready, so one is more likely to eat the right food than, driven by hunger, grab the wrong food or (3) finding a friend with whom to walk or exercise, so one is more likely to follow through, especially before exercise becomes a habit.
As much as I consider myself a scientist, I have not been happy with some of the discussions I have read in which a poster feels discouraged or explains how he/she gained weight, and the CICO crowd is disparaging and essentially says to man up. We don't want to just make excuses, but analyzing how we got to be overweight and then making the changes that will make us more likely to follow CI<CO is the key. That's science, too.
Scientists, weigh in (no pun intended) here, please!
0 -
tincanonastring wrote: »Look for people with jailbars over their avatar.
LOL but sadly true too many times.0 -
Enthusiastically raises hand!rightsensible wrote: »I am trying to lose weight, but trying to stick to facts and scientific evidence. I am trying to avoid talks about detox, cleanses, alkaline, non gmo, or anything else not based in science. Basically I am looking for friends to add, but anytime I see someone I think I'll get along with, I never see an option to add them.
0 -
Right here! Say no to broscience haha0
-
As much as I consider myself a scientist, I have not been happy with some of the discussions I have read in which a poster feels discouraged or explains how he/she gained weight, and the CICO crowd is disparaging and essentially says to man up. We don't want to just make excuses, but analyzing how we got to be overweight and then making the changes that will make us more likely to follow CI<CO is the key. That's science, too.
Scientists, weigh in (no pun intended) here, please!
Sadly, I think the issue is that too many people are looking for that "magic pill" or quick fix that will make their weight loss easy/fast. We are bombarded from every angle with people trying to sell diet/nutrition supplements that they SWEAR will work (i.e. Isagenix, ItWorks!, detoxes/cleanses, etc.) and these people/companies prey on people's desperation and lack of knowledge. Often times, they wind up here AFTER purchasing these products and are intent on them working, so when they hear CI/CO there is (predictably) resistance. I think people who have had long term success are very passionate about what works, and those who are selling these quick fixes are passionate about them (and making money), so when those mindsets clash....well, the result is what you have described above.
ETA: I am not a scientist, but I am passionate about health and fitness and try my best to stay informed.
0 -
I love that you added this and want to follow this thread! I'm a retired medical doctor.
One word of caution, though, is that the studies in this area are not reliable enough that they don't contradict one another very frequently. A quick look through the "Well" blogs on the NY Times will give you contradictory information about how much you need to exercise and what to eat to maximize weight loss or general fitness, all that information supported by scientific research. Also, consider how dietary recommendations have changed over the years (now it's that we didn't need to be drinking skim milk), although a lot of those recommendations were not based in hard enough science. So, I'd say common sense is still in order, and view anything new with skepticism until it is well replicated.
Another thought is that psychology is also a science, with more overlap with biology all the time as we learn more about neurotransmitters and brain activity as they affect behavior. Considering the factors that influence behavior can be a huge help in losing weight. Is that something that you want in in this thread, or should that be its own topic?
If Shadowfax_c11 is an animal trainer, maybe she can add her opinion here and a better explanation than I can give, but there has been a lot of old and well-documented research in the field of behavior. You probably all know Skinner and Pavlov, but look up Bob Bailey, the Brelands, and Dr. Susan Friedman, whose field is applied behavioral analysis, in Utah (behaviorworks.org).
I don't think that anyone here doubts the validity of CICO, the need for a nutritious diet, especially in the long term, and the benefits of exercise. However, despite our knowing that we were eating more than we should have been to maintain or lose weight, we did it anyway. Losing weight required a change in the behavior of eating. In animal training through positive reinforcement, it is beneficial to set the learner up for success by controlling the antecedents, that is, setting the stage so that the learner is more likely to be right. Controlling the antecedents can be hugely helpful in achieving weight loss. Examples would be (1) getting enough sleep, as there are studies showing that sleep deprivation is linked to weight gain and increased appetite - so, maybe turning off the laptop and turning in to bed will help (2) having healthy meals ready, so one is more likely to eat the right food than, driven by hunger, grab the wrong food or (3) finding a friend with whom to walk or exercise, so one is more likely to follow through, especially before exercise becomes a habit.
As much as I consider myself a scientist, I have not been happy with some of the discussions I have read in which a poster feels discouraged or explains how he/she gained weight, and the CICO crowd is disparaging and essentially says to man up. We don't want to just make excuses, but analyzing how we got to be overweight and then making the changes that will make us more likely to follow CI<CO is the key. That's science, too.
Scientists, weigh in (no pun intended) here, please
Blogs are not science. That would be like taking health advice from a magazine (who is just trying to sell their latest issue) or from Dr. Oz who is just trying to hawk the latest fad and get ad revenue.
Peer reviewed primary sources are science. And that disparaging CICO crowd? They (we) are usually the first to step up and try to help someone here.0 -
forwardmoving wrote: »tincanonastring wrote: »Look for people with jailbars over their avatar.
LOL but sadly true too many times.
What is that about anyway...is it mfp probation? I never found any of those people offensive. If anything, too straightforward for other's likings.
Science ftw! Only thing that has truly helped me. Gah I HATE those "ItWorks" crap!! Along with any other gimmick...and sadly there are many0 -
I mentioned the Well blog because it's something a lot of people can read without a library subscription to the scientific literature. (Most is behind a paywall now, if you want more than the abstract.) Here's today's column, which quotes a doctor at the Harvard School of Public Health and gives links to studies (alas, the abstract).
http://well.blogs.nytimes.com/2015/10/19/the-fats-you-dont-need-to-fear-and-the-carbs-that-you-do/?hp&action=click&pgtype=Homepage&module=mini-moth®ion=top-stories-below&WT.nav=top-stories-below&_r=0
I don't always agree with the New York Times, but I think most would consider it more reliable than Dr. Oz.
I diet and maintain based on CICO, so am part of the CICO crowd myself. I don't mean that everyone is disparaging, but there have been times that I've read posts on mfp from discouraged people, and I think that the responses could have been gentler and more encouraging. I doubt that there really are many people out there who didn't already know that they gained weight because they were eating more calories than they were expending.
0 -
I mentioned the Well blog because it's something a lot of people can read without a library subscription to the scientific literature. (Most is behind a paywall now, if you want more than the abstract.) Here's today's column, which quotes a doctor at the Harvard School of Public Health and gives links to studies (alas, the abstract).
http://well.blogs.nytimes.com/2015/10/19/the-fats-you-dont-need-to-fear-and-the-carbs-that-you-do/?hp&action=click&pgtype=Homepage&module=mini-moth®ion=top-stories-below&WT.nav=top-stories-below&_r=0
I don't always agree with the New York Times, but I think most would consider it more reliable than Dr. Oz.
I diet and maintain based on CICO, so am part of the CICO crowd myself. I don't mean that everyone is disparaging, but there have been times that I've read posts on mfp from discouraged people, and I think that the responses could have been gentler and more encouraging. I doubt that there really are many people out there who didn't already know that they gained weight because they were eating more calories than they were expending.
I agree wholeheartedly.
0 -
I mentioned the Well blog because it's something a lot of people can read without a library subscription to the scientific literature. (Most is behind a paywall now, if you want more than the abstract.) Here's today's column, which quotes a doctor at the Harvard School of Public Health and gives links to studies (alas, the abstract).
http://well.blogs.nytimes.com/2015/10/19/the-fats-you-dont-need-to-fear-and-the-carbs-that-you-do/?hp&action=click&pgtype=Homepage&module=mini-moth®ion=top-stories-below&WT.nav=top-stories-below&_r=0
I don't always agree with the New York Times, but I think most would consider it more reliable than Dr. Oz.
I diet and maintain based on CICO, so am part of the CICO crowd myself. I don't mean that everyone is disparaging, but there have been times that I've read posts on mfp from discouraged people, and I think that the responses could have been gentler and more encouraging. I doubt that there really are many people out there who didn't already know that they gained weight because they were eating more calories than they were expending.
You'd be surprised. I just saw a post last night in which the person claimed they were eating more than TDEE and losing weight (not logging food, but she's sure of it) and not a day goes by without the special snowflake threads (I'm eating 1200 calories and running for 2 hours a day and I'm not losing). People don't always understand the concept and, in many cases, refuse to learn it even after their approach has failed. When people are being deliberately obtuse, I don't see a problem with bluntness.0 -
Biochemist here.
However, I would caution pro science people that we don't necessarily have the big picture about why some people are overweight and some people aren't, or why there is an obesity epidemic. Just telling people to eat less and exercise more doesn't seem to be ending the epidemic, though it has worked for me personally.0 -
tincanonastring wrote: »I mentioned the Well blog because it's something a lot of people can read without a library subscription to the scientific literature. (Most is behind a paywall now, if you want more than the abstract.) Here's today's column, which quotes a doctor at the Harvard School of Public Health and gives links to studies (alas, the abstract).
http://well.blogs.nytimes.com/2015/10/19/the-fats-you-dont-need-to-fear-and-the-carbs-that-you-do/?hp&action=click&pgtype=Homepage&module=mini-moth®ion=top-stories-below&WT.nav=top-stories-below&_r=0
I don't always agree with the New York Times, but I think most would consider it more reliable than Dr. Oz.
I diet and maintain based on CICO, so am part of the CICO crowd myself. I don't mean that everyone is disparaging, but there have been times that I've read posts on mfp from discouraged people, and I think that the responses could have been gentler and more encouraging. I doubt that there really are many people out there who didn't already know that they gained weight because they were eating more calories than they were expending.
You'd be surprised. I just saw a post last night in which the person claimed they were eating more than TDEE and losing weight (not logging food, but she's sure of it) and not a day goes by without the special snowflake threads (I'm eating 1200 calories and running for 2 hours a day and I'm not losing). People don't always understand the concept and, in many cases, refuse to learn it even after their approach has failed. When people are being deliberately obtuse, I don't see a problem with bluntness.
Being blunt is one thing. Mocking and derogatory are another. Not meaning you, btw. I haven't encountered it in your posts that I recall.
0 -
goldthistime wrote: »tincanonastring wrote: »I mentioned the Well blog because it's something a lot of people can read without a library subscription to the scientific literature. (Most is behind a paywall now, if you want more than the abstract.) Here's today's column, which quotes a doctor at the Harvard School of Public Health and gives links to studies (alas, the abstract).
http://well.blogs.nytimes.com/2015/10/19/the-fats-you-dont-need-to-fear-and-the-carbs-that-you-do/?hp&action=click&pgtype=Homepage&module=mini-moth®ion=top-stories-below&WT.nav=top-stories-below&_r=0
I don't always agree with the New York Times, but I think most would consider it more reliable than Dr. Oz.
I diet and maintain based on CICO, so am part of the CICO crowd myself. I don't mean that everyone is disparaging, but there have been times that I've read posts on mfp from discouraged people, and I think that the responses could have been gentler and more encouraging. I doubt that there really are many people out there who didn't already know that they gained weight because they were eating more calories than they were expending.
You'd be surprised. I just saw a post last night in which the person claimed they were eating more than TDEE and losing weight (not logging food, but she's sure of it) and not a day goes by without the special snowflake threads (I'm eating 1200 calories and running for 2 hours a day and I'm not losing). People don't always understand the concept and, in many cases, refuse to learn it even after their approach has failed. When people are being deliberately obtuse, I don't see a problem with bluntness.
Being blunt is one thing. Mocking and derogatory are another. Not meaning you, btw. I haven't encountered it in your posts that I recall.
What!?! I'll have to step up my mockery game!
I do agree, though, that a person should not be attacked. A ridiculous idea, however, deserves to be ridiculed!0 -
lithezebra wrote: »Biochemist here.
However, I would caution pro science people that we don't necessarily have the big picture about why some people are overweight and some people aren't, or why there is an obesity epidemic. Just telling people to eat less and exercise more doesn't seem to be ending the epidemic, though it has worked for me personally.
And isn't that the issue, though? Whenever it comes down to the individual level, a person exercising more and eating less, i.e. in a calorie deficit, invariably loses the weight. I've yet to hear of someone without a medical condition where that wasn't the case.0 -
tincanonastring wrote: »lithezebra wrote: »Biochemist here.
However, I would caution pro science people that we don't necessarily have the big picture about why some people are overweight and some people aren't, or why there is an obesity epidemic. Just telling people to eat less and exercise more doesn't seem to be ending the epidemic, though it has worked for me personally.
And isn't that the issue, though? Whenever it comes down to the individual level, a person exercising more and eating less, i.e. in a calorie deficit, invariably loses the weight. I've yet to hear of someone without a medical condition where that wasn't the case.
But the real question is HOW to stay in a calorie deficit for an extended period of time, and how to stay in balance forever after. No simple answers there IMO.
PS I should have probably started with "I love science too". Love reading and considering the actual studies. Love logical respectful discussion. I don't even have to be right to be happy. Just need to have learned something.
0 -
goldthistime wrote: »tincanonastring wrote: »lithezebra wrote: »Biochemist here.
However, I would caution pro science people that we don't necessarily have the big picture about why some people are overweight and some people aren't, or why there is an obesity epidemic. Just telling people to eat less and exercise more doesn't seem to be ending the epidemic, though it has worked for me personally.
And isn't that the issue, though? Whenever it comes down to the individual level, a person exercising more and eating less, i.e. in a calorie deficit, invariably loses the weight. I've yet to hear of someone without a medical condition where that wasn't the case.
But the real question is HOW to stay in a calorie deficit for an extended period of time, and how to stay in balance forever after. No simple answers there IMO.
PS I should have probably started with "I love science too". Love reading and considering the actual studies. Love logical respectful discussion.
I'm not sure I understand what you mean about how to stay in a deficit. Depending on sex, age, & height, your TDEE could get low enough where a significant calorie deficit would put your intake too low to achieve optimum nutrition, but most everybody can achieve enough of a calorie deficit to lose weight slowly without hitting that lower limit.
Maintenance is still just a balance of CI vs CO. It may be difficult to figure out what the CO is from a maintenance standpoint, but trial and error should get you there.0
Categories
- All Categories
- 1.4M Health, Wellness and Goals
- 392K Introduce Yourself
- 43.6K Getting Started
- 259.8K Health and Weight Loss
- 175.7K Food and Nutrition
- 47.4K Recipes
- 232.3K Fitness and Exercise
- 403 Sleep, Mindfulness and Overall Wellness
- 6.4K Goal: Maintaining Weight
- 8.5K Goal: Gaining Weight and Body Building
- 152.8K Motivation and Support
- 7.9K Challenges
- 1.3K Debate Club
- 96.3K Chit-Chat
- 2.5K Fun and Games
- 3.4K MyFitnessPal Information
- 23 News and Announcements
- 999 Feature Suggestions and Ideas
- 2.4K MyFitnessPal Tech Support Questions